Nuking Foreign Policy

WASHINGTON — American politicos talk incessantly about the Middle East, the U.S. military commitment in Iraq, the fighting in Afghanistan, the hunt for guerrillas in Pakistan, and the violence between Israelis and Palestinians. They seem to have forgotten, however, about Korea.

No one in any of the televised debates has asked any of the Republican or Democratic presidential candidates about North Korea's nuclear weapons. Nor have any of the hundreds of reporters covering all the candidates raised questions about North Korea.

As the race to succeed President Bush becomes ever narrower, speculation mounts as to what each of the major players — John McCain, Hillary Clinton, or Barack Obama — are likely to do to persuade north Korea to abandon its nukes. The question mounts in importance as the conservative Lee Myung-bak awaits inauguration on February 25 as president of South Korea. Mr. Lee will fly to Washington after South Korea's National Assembly elections on April 9 in hopes of rebuilding rapport after a decade of strained relations between the White House and the last two occupants of the Blue House, outgoing President Roh Moo-hyun and Roh's predecessor, Kim Dae-jung, whose Sunshine Policy of reconciliation transformed inter-Korean relations.

Undoubtedly, Senator McCain offers the best hope for going along with a needed turn of South Korea's policy toward the north. In fact, Mr. McCain, arguing for a semi-permanent U.S. troop presence in Iraq, included South Korea on a short list of other countries where America has had troops "for many, many years."

At odds with both Senators Obama and Clinton on the U.S.commitment to Iraq, Mr. McCain could be expected to oppose any moves to reduce the number of American troops in South Korea, already down to 25,000 from 37,500 five years ago.

"It is," Mr. McCain wrote in the American journal Foreign Affairs, "unclear today whether North Korea is truly committed to verifiable denuclearization and a full accounting of all nuclear materials and facilities, two steps that are necessary before any lasting diplomatic agreement can be reached." We must in future talks, he went on, "take into account North Korea's ballistic missile programs, its abduction of Japanese citizens, and its support for terrorism and proliferation" — all issues that North Korea is sure to refuse to discuss.

If Senator McCain's outlook appears to mesh with president-elect Lee's insistence on verification and reciprocity as prerequisites for aid, they are clearly at variance with the conciliatory tone of both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama.

"North Korea responded to the Bush administration's effort to isolate it by accelerating its nuclear program, conducting a nuclear test, and building more nuclear weapons," Mrs. Clinton wrote in Foreign Affairs. "only since the State Department returned to diplomacy have we been able, belatedly, to make progress."

Mr. Obama appears even more enthusiastic about the Sunshine policy. He has made negotiations a centerpiece of a drive to rebuild alliances. "needed reform of these alliances and institutions will not come by bullying other countries to ratify changes we hatch in isolation," he wrote in Foreign Affairs. "In Asia, we belittled South Korean efforts to improve relations with the north."

If either Mr. Obama or Mrs. Clinton wins the presidency, a key player in foreign policy may well be the governor of New Mexico, Bill Richardson, who dropped out as a rival for the Democratic nomination but would love to be on the Democratic ticket as a vice presidential candidate. Alternatively, Mr. Richardson, who served as ambassador to the United Nations and was Energy Secretary under the first Clinton administration, would be delighted with an appointment as Secretary of State.

Thus Mr. Richardson's Foreign Affairs piece may be just as significant as those of the three leading candidates, especially considering that he has visited North Korea a number of times, has criticized the hard line of the Bush administration, and has been a staunch advocate of reconciliation.

It would, he wrote, "require tough and persistent U.S. diplomacy to unite the world, including China and Russia, behind efforts to contain the nuclear ambitions of Iran and North Korea, even as we provide these nations with incentives and face-saving ways to permanently renounce nuclear weapons."

The bottom line, as expressed by Governor Richardson: "We should remember that no nation has ever been forced to renounce nuclear weapons but that many nations have been convinced to renounce them." He specifically cites Libya but clearly has North Korea in mind.

A Clinton victory might bring another familiar name into the equation: Bill Clinton.

Remember, Mr. Clinton, in the waning weeks of his presidency in 2000, was considering a quick trip to Pyongyang. A visit from a Clinton may happen after the State Department removes North Korea from America's list of countries sponsoring terrorism, which would open diplomatic relations between Washington and Pyongyang. Mr. Kim, of course, could be expected to demand a vast infusion of aid in return for only the vaguest "proof" that he's given up his nukes.

Mr. Kirk, author of two books on Korea, is a freelance correspondent based in Seoul and Washington, D.C.